Obama's Universal Healthcare Question

[auditor0007]

No... because that is not a job that the government was set up to do... and lest we not forget, your body is not public domain... your care is YOUR responsibility, just like wiping your own ass is... neither may be pleasant, but you are dead wrong if you think it is someone else's responsibility

We HAVE decent access to the best healthcare in the world.... you don't like the price... well I don't like the price of milk, but I do not believe it is the government's job to take over milk production or to subsidize the price of milk with our tax dollars when it is my choice what I eat

Our government was not set up to explore a continent, or put a man on the moon. But we did. We can also set up a universal health care system within our Constitutional laws.

Your other rather stupid analogy is ridiculous. We set up a universal education system for the betterment of our nation, a great President, Roosevelt, suggested a universal health care system nearly a hundred years ago.

Hmmm... education of minors equates to personal care of adults?? Nope.. sorry.. that bird don't fly

Do I think NASA spending should be cut in times of crisis? Yep... but on the other hand.. lest you forget the industry and advances that came about because of that research

And yep.. the overrated F. Roosevelt suggested a lot of things.. implemented a lot of horrible things too that extended the depression... the man, while popular and elected all those times, did do a lot wrong and set a lot of poor precedent for big government

He wasn't talking about Franklin Roosevelt.

 

[auditor0007]

roy

practically nobody is saying that there is noting that could not get better in terms of insurance availability etc.... there are ALWAYS things to fix... but not inherently by government takeover of any aspect of it... with more controls, bureaucracy, etc...

And the WHO is already exposed as bullshit on the rankings.... and it is done credibly and with common sense logic.... it was inherently skewed by an affinity towards socialized systems... without taking major things into account.. like we have the most advanced fucking care in the world

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Why the U.S. Ranks Low on WHO's Health-Care Study

Good article Dave. I do believe we have the best healthcare overall; it's just not cost effective. And to this point, you haven't given us an alternative that would reduce costs and keep it affordable for everyone.

 

[auditor0007]

roy

practically nobody is saying that there is noting that could not get better in terms of insurance availability etc.... there are ALWAYS things to fix... but not inherently by government takeover of any aspect of it... with more controls, bureaucracy, etc...

And the WHO is already exposed as bullshit on the rankings.... and it is done credibly and with common sense logic.... it was inherently skewed by an affinity towards socialized systems... without taking major things into account.. like we have the most advanced fucking care in the world

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Why the U.S. Ranks Low on WHO's Health-Care Study

I haven't exactly found John Stossel to be great on the truth-telling front.

But let's look at the choice of information sources and weigh them ....

right hand... World Health Organization...

left hand... John Stossel

hmmmmmmmmm..... not a huge amount of choice there for me.

The article is based in solid information, and it makes sense. My argument is not just about quality though; it's about cost, and the fact that the rising costs will soon drive the vast majority out of the market for health insurance very soon. We are at a breaking point as companies cannot afford it any longer and still remain competetive on a global level. In the long run, continuing on our current path will lead to a lower standard of living for all but the very few in the US.

 

[johnrocks]

Those mandates really help the acupuncturist business however EVERY policy has this which is a cost shoved up ALL our asses because YOU choose to smoke.

and if you choose to be fat or not exercise or marry someone with terrible genes for certain illnesses, then *I* pay for it.

That's life.

you simply aren't getting it.

Your the one not "getting it:. A 50 year old woman in my zip code can get private insurance that covers the major stuff up to 5 million dollars for $82.18 per month , $5000 deductible and most out of pocket per year is $6000, it then kicks in at 100% up to 5 million. But no, people want the bruised knees, runny noses,ear aches and mammograms paid for, the things that is very predictable, which is nothing more than pre paid health plans, not insurance. Insurance is needed to spread the risk of unknown circumstances to a greater pool of people, thus protecting your assets, not pay for smoking cessation classes and tummy tucks! A fat ass( I can say this, being a fat ass myself,lol) can't and shouldn't get private health insurance, group insurance is the stupidest thing created, forcing companies to insure people even if they have cancer already, take insulin or are 200 pounds overweight, those people need something but it's not insurance.

 

[auditor0007]

Good points, except concerning the quality of health care in the nations that have universal health care. They all have longer life spans, and much lower infant mortality than we do.

The uninsured young people very seldom 'choose' to be in that position. By the time they pay rent, food, and transportation, they do not have the money to be self insured. All too many entry level jobs carry no health benefits.

The longer life span is due, in great part, to our higher infant mortality rate, which is due to a lack of prenatal care for many of our poor. The other part of that equation, however, is due to our poor eating habits and rate of obesity. And there are problems with universal healthcare in those countries. Neither system is perfect.

At one point I was dating a woman from Scotland. Her son needed to see a specialist, and it took thirteen months before they would see him. Much of those problems though, could be resolved if they paid more. In the UK, they do have the option of carrying private insurance on top of their national plan. Those who do receive care much sooner than those without.

The solution lies somewhere in the middle. A one payer system makes much more sense and would reduce administrative costs dramatically. At the same time, I don't want to see doctors becoming employees of the national system like it is in Canada.

Don't forget that we more accurately keep our statistics.. we attempt to save more premature babies and do more things with younger and younger gestational births etc...

And a monopolized '1 place' system is never the answer for a commodity or service... competition drives lower costs and improvement... not monopoly

In the case of healthcare you are absolutely wrong. The proof is in the numbers. We pay twice what everyone in the rest of the world pays, and the fact is, we can no longer afford to do so if we wish to remain competetive in other areas.

 

[auditor0007]

Good points, except concerning the quality of health care in the nations that have universal health care. They all have longer life spans, and much lower infant mortality than we do.

The uninsured young people very seldom 'choose' to be in that position. By the time they pay rent, food, and transportation, they do not have the money to be self insured. All too many entry level jobs carry no health benefits.

The longer life span is due, in great part, to our higher infant mortality rate, which is due to a lack of prenatal care for many of our poor. The other part of that equation, however, is due to our poor eating habits and rate of obesity. And there are problems with universal healthcare in those countries. Neither system is perfect.

At one point I was dating a woman from Scotland. Her son needed to see a specialist, and it took thirteen months before they would see him. Much of those problems though, could be resolved if they paid more. In the UK, they do have the option of carrying private insurance on top of their national plan. Those who do receive care much sooner than those without.

The solution lies somewhere in the middle. A one payer system makes much more sense and would reduce administrative costs dramatically. At the same time, I don't want to see doctors becoming employees of the national system like it is in Canada.

Don't forget that we more accurately keep our statistics.. we attempt to save more premature babies and do more things with younger and younger gestational births etc...

And a monopolized '1 place' system is never the answer for a commodity or service... competition drives lower costs and improvement... not monopoly

I'll make another argument here also. I have no access to this so-called competetion because I have a pre-existing condition. It wasn't anything I did to myself; it's genetic. However, because of this, I can't shop around for the best price. I am stuck with my current insurance company for life. If I lose my income and can't afford my insurance payment for even one month, I'll never be able to get health insurance again. On top of that, I am limited as to where I can live because I can only live in states where my insurance company is licensed. I'm lucky that they would even transfer my policy between states. Most insurance companies won't. That's real competetion for the people Dave.

 

[jillian]

Your the one not "getting it:. A 50 year old woman in my zip code can get private insurance that covers the major stuff up to 5 million dollars for $82.18 per month , $5000 deductible and most out of pocket per year is $6000, it then kicks in at 100% up to 5 million. But no, people want the bruised knees, runny noses,ear aches and mammograms paid for, the things that is very predictable, which is nothing more than pre paid health plans, not insurance. Insurance is needed to spread the risk of unknown circumstances to a greater pool of people, thus protecting your assets, not pay for smoking cessation classes and tummy tucks! A fat ass( I can say this, being a fat ass myself,lol) can't and shouldn't get private health insurance, group insurance is the stupidest thing created, forcing companies to insure people even if they have cancer already, take insulin or are 200 pounds overweight, those people need something but it's not insurance.

I'll leave you to Auditor... he's dead on right in everything he's said on this thread and he's said it better than I have.

 

[johnrocks]

Your the one not "getting it:. A 50 year old woman in my zip code can get private insurance that covers the major stuff up to 5 million dollars for $82.18 per month , $5000 deductible and most out of pocket per year is $6000, it then kicks in at 100% up to 5 million. But no, people want the bruised knees, runny noses,ear aches and mammograms paid for, the things that is very predictable, which is nothing more than pre paid health plans, not insurance. Insurance is needed to spread the risk of unknown circumstances to a greater pool of people, thus protecting your assets, not pay for smoking cessation classes and tummy tucks! A fat ass( I can say this, being a fat ass myself,lol) can't and shouldn't get private health insurance, group insurance is the stupidest thing created, forcing companies to insure people even if they have cancer already, take insulin or are 200 pounds overweight, those people need something but it's not insurance.

I'll leave you to Auditor... he's dead on right in everything he's said on this thread and he's said it better than I have.

lol, we probably agree on a lot(me and Auditor) and even you and I however a message board is hard for me to critique everything into one neat little post. We also agree about Corporatism it seems but that, to me, is far from free market capitalism.

 

[auditor0007]

Those mandates really help the acupuncturist business however EVERY policy has this which is a cost shoved up ALL our asses because YOU choose to smoke.

and if you choose to be fat or not exercise or marry someone with terrible genes for certain illnesses, then *I* pay for it.

That's life.

you simply aren't getting it.

Your the one not "getting it:. A 50 year old woman in my zip code can get private insurance that covers the major stuff up to 5 million dollars for $82.18 per month , $5000 deductible and most out of pocket per year is $6000, it then kicks in at 100% up to 5 million. But no, people want the bruised knees, runny noses,ear aches and mammograms paid for, the things that is very predictable, which is nothing more than pre paid health plans, not insurance. Insurance is needed to spread the risk of unknown circumstances to a greater pool of people, thus protecting your assets, not pay for smoking cessation classes and tummy tucks! A fat ass( I can say this, being a fat ass myself,lol) can't and shouldn't get private health insurance, group insurance is the stupidest thing created, forcing companies to insure people even if they have cancer already, take insulin or are 200 pounds overweight, those people need something but it's not insurance.

You keep telling us that if we paid cash for the majority of our healthcare, that services would be much cheaper due to competetion. I have a question for you. Have you ever seen a medical bill that was covered by insurance from a doctor or hospital?

I see mine all the time. I have to have a pint of blood removed from my body every other month. I can't donate it for various reasons, the biggest being that after doing this for so long, my veins are scarred, and using a 16 gauge needle is out of the question at this point. Getting to my point; if I paid for this rather simple procedure, the hospital would charge me close to $600. My insurance company only pays them around $340. The first $1000 is on me as my deductible, but I only have to pay the $340 because of the discount given through the insurance company. So, if I paid cash, I'd be paying an additional $260 for each phlebotomy. That right there seems to shoot a big hole in your theory.

I'm sorry, but healthcare is unlike other industries. The only competetion is to collect more dollars any way possible.

 

[johnrocks]

and if you choose to be fat or not exercise or marry someone with terrible genes for certain illnesses, then *I* pay for it.

That's life.

you simply aren't getting it.

Your the one not "getting it:. A 50 year old woman in my zip code can get private insurance that covers the major stuff up to 5 million dollars for $82.18 per month , $5000 deductible and most out of pocket per year is $6000, it then kicks in at 100% up to 5 million. But no, people want the bruised knees, runny noses,ear aches and mammograms paid for, the things that is very predictable, which is nothing more than pre paid health plans, not insurance. Insurance is needed to spread the risk of unknown circumstances to a greater pool of people, thus protecting your assets, not pay for smoking cessation classes and tummy tucks! A fat ass( I can say this, being a fat ass myself,lol) can't and shouldn't get private health insurance, group insurance is the stupidest thing created, forcing companies to insure people even if they have cancer already, take insulin or are 200 pounds overweight, those people need something but it's not insurance.

You keep telling us that if we paid cash for the majority of our healthcare, that services would be much cheaper due to competetion. I have a question for you. Have you ever seen a medical bill that was covered by insurance from a doctor or hospital?

I see mine all the time. I have to have a pint of blood removed from my body every other month. I can't donate it for various reasons, the biggest being that after doing this for so long, my veins are scarred, and using a 16 gauge needle is out of the question at this point. Getting to my point; if I paid for this rather simple procedure, the hospital would charge me close to $600. My insurance company only pays them around $340. The first $1000 is on me as my deductible, but I only have to pay the $340 because of the discount given through the insurance company. So, if I paid cash, I'd be paying an additional $260 for each phlebotomy. That right there seems to shoot a big hole in your theory.

I'm sorry, but healthcare is unlike other industries. The only competetion is to collect more dollars any way possible.

I see them constantly, my Mom is in Medicare and I sell Medicare Supplements and other Senior Insurance products. I can go to free market labs that take cash only and pays a lot less than you pay. Group insurance has got to be one of the most ignorant things ever created. You seem to be comparing the failed group to socialized healthcare in other nations and that along with government intervention is what has caused costs to rise so much, that's the hole(gaping that it is) in your theory.

I can get all these tests at a free market lab.....

Complete Blood Count (CBC)
Chemistry Panel
Fibrinogen
C- Reactive Protein (CRP)
Homocysteine
Hemoglobin A1C
DHEA
Free Testosterone
Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH)
Estradiol

For $396 What tests you want and pay for is high because of government intervention..not free market, it works as good as it does in spite of government intervention, in fact, I'm surprised it works as well as it does with so much government intervention.

 

[auditor0007]

Your the one not "getting it:. A 50 year old woman in my zip code can get private insurance that covers the major stuff up to 5 million dollars for $82.18 per month , $5000 deductible and most out of pocket per year is $6000, it then kicks in at 100% up to 5 million. But no, people want the bruised knees, runny noses,ear aches and mammograms paid for, the things that is very predictable, which is nothing more than pre paid health plans, not insurance. Insurance is needed to spread the risk of unknown circumstances to a greater pool of people, thus protecting your assets, not pay for smoking cessation classes and tummy tucks! A fat ass( I can say this, being a fat ass myself,lol) can't and shouldn't get private health insurance, group insurance is the stupidest thing created, forcing companies to insure people even if they have cancer already, take insulin or are 200 pounds overweight, those people need something but it's not insurance.

You keep telling us that if we paid cash for the majority of our healthcare, that services would be much cheaper due to competetion. I have a question for you. Have you ever seen a medical bill that was covered by insurance from a doctor or hospital?

I see mine all the time. I have to have a pint of blood removed from my body every other month. I can't donate it for various reasons, the biggest being that after doing this for so long, my veins are scarred, and using a 16 gauge needle is out of the question at this point. Getting to my point; if I paid for this rather simple procedure, the hospital would charge me close to $600. My insurance company only pays them around $340. The first $1000 is on me as my deductible, but I only have to pay the $340 because of the discount given through the insurance company. So, if I paid cash, I'd be paying an additional $260 for each phlebotomy. That right there seems to shoot a big hole in your theory.

I'm sorry, but healthcare is unlike other industries. The only competetion is to collect more dollars any way possible.

I see them constantly, my Mom is in Medicare and I sell Medicare Supplements and other Senior Insurance products. I can go to free market labs that take cash only and pays a lot less than you pay. Group insurance has got to be one of the most ignorant things ever created. You seem to be comparing the failed group to socialized healthcare in other nations and that along with government intervention is what has caused costs to rise so much, that's the hole(gaping that it is) in your theory.

I can get all these tests at a free market lab.....

Complete Blood Count (CBC)
Chemistry Panel
Fibrinogen
C- Reactive Protein (CRP)
Homocysteine
Hemoglobin A1C
DHEA
Free Testosterone
Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH)
Estradiol

For $396 What tests you want and pay for is high because of government intervention..not free market, it works as good as it does in spite of government intervention, in fact, I'm surprised it works as well as it does with so much government intervention.

Okay, so I can get blood tests cheaper at a local lab paying cash. Now, can you tell me where I can get a phlebotomy a lot cheaper by paying cash? I also need an ultra sound done at least once per year, and an upper GI done every three years. Will those be cheaper if I offer them cash?

I'm not really complaining about my health insurance as it is pretty good for a private policy. However, the costs have nearly doubled in the last five years. I still pay a lot less than I would if I paid for a group policy through my business. If I actually paid cash for everything, I'd be paying a little less than I now pay. Of course, I would still need a major medical plan.

 

[johnrocks]

You keep telling us that if we paid cash for the majority of our healthcare, that services would be much cheaper due to competetion. I have a question for you. Have you ever seen a medical bill that was covered by insurance from a doctor or hospital?

I see mine all the time. I have to have a pint of blood removed from my body every other month. I can't donate it for various reasons, the biggest being that after doing this for so long, my veins are scarred, and using a 16 gauge needle is out of the question at this point. Getting to my point; if I paid for this rather simple procedure, the hospital would charge me close to $600. My insurance company only pays them around $340. The first $1000 is on me as my deductible, but I only have to pay the $340 because of the discount given through the insurance company. So, if I paid cash, I'd be paying an additional $260 for each phlebotomy. That right there seems to shoot a big hole in your theory.

I'm sorry, but healthcare is unlike other industries. The only competetion is to collect more dollars any way possible.

I see them constantly, my Mom is in Medicare and I sell Medicare Supplements and other Senior Insurance products. I can go to free market labs that take cash only and pays a lot less than you pay. Group insurance has got to be one of the most ignorant things ever created. You seem to be comparing the failed group to socialized healthcare in other nations and that along with government intervention is what has caused costs to rise so much, that's the hole(gaping that it is) in your theory.

I can get all these tests at a free market lab.....

Complete Blood Count (CBC)
Chemistry Panel
Fibrinogen
C- Reactive Protein (CRP)
Homocysteine
Hemoglobin A1C
DHEA
Free Testosterone
Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH)
Estradiol

For $396 What tests you want and pay for is high because of government intervention..not free market, it works as good as it does in spite of government intervention, in fact, I'm surprised it works as well as it does with so much government intervention.

Okay, so I can get blood tests cheaper at a local lab paying cash. Now, can you tell me where I can get a phlebotomy a lot cheaper by paying cash? I also need an ultra sound done at least once per year, and an upper GI done every three years. Will those be cheaper if I offer them cash?

I'm not really complaining about my health insurance as it is pretty good for a private policy. However, the costs have nearly doubled in the last five years. I still pay a lot less than I would if I paid for a group policy through my business. If I actually paid cash for everything, I'd be paying a little less than I now pay. Of course, I would still need a major medical plan.

That is all people need is major medical. Health ins. is going up as the result of healthcare costs going up and that is going up because of the third party money from government and other sources, it's a vicious circle. If the money dried up, healthcare professionals would have no choice but to charge less.

 

[Old Rocks]

So I assume it will be more important to keep tax payers alive then non-tax payers?

I've seen polls that claim that 82-85% of Americans are satisfied with their particular health care, and also studies that shoot down the "47 million Americans are without healthcare" figure, and place place it at under 8%.

If these studies are true, what is the reason for the $600 Billion Obama Healthcare Proposal, other than socialization?[/QUOTE]

You have seen polls? But you cannot post the referances? Pretty damned lazy of you, Willow. Or could there be another reason that you do not post your sources?



Chic! 600 billion is just the down payment,, his cost his going to run in the un as yet foreclosed trillions..